IMPORTANT POINT
Supply of documents to arrestee – Person asserted, if he is informed or made aware orally about grounds of arrest at the time of his arrest and is furnished a written communication about grounds of arrest as early as possible and within reasonably convenient and requisite time of twenty-four hours of his arrest, that would be sufficient compliance of not only Section 19 of PMLA but also of Article 22(1) of Constitution of India.

JUDGMENT :

(Bela M. Trivedi, J.)

1. Leave granted.

2. The present appeal is directed against the judgment and order dated 22.09.2023 passed by the High Court of Delhi at New Delhi, in Writ Petition (Crl.) No. 2408/2023, whereby the High Court has dismissed the said petition seeking declaration that the arrest of the appellant on 27.06.2023 by the respondent Directorate of Enforcement (hereinafter referred to as the ED) was illegal and violative of the fundamental rights guaranteed to the appellant under Articles 14, 20 and 21 of the Constitution of India, and seeking direction to release the appellant forthwith. The appellant had also sought direction to quash the order of remand dated 28.06.2023 passed by the ASJ/05, PMLA, Patiala House Courts, New Delhi (hereinafter referred to as the “Special Court”), in ECIR No. STF/21/2021.

3. Dehors the facts, a neat question of law that has been raised before this Court is, whether the action of the respondent ED in handing over the document containing the grounds of the arrest to arrestee and taking it back after obtaining the endorsement and his signature thereon, as a token of he having read the same, and in not furnishing a copy thereof to the arrestee at the time of arrest would render the arrest illegal under Section 19 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 (hereinafter referred to as PMLA)?

FACTUAL MATRIX:-

4. The bare minimum facts required to decide the above questions of law are as follows: -

(i) The appellant was the founder of M/s Supertech Limited, a real estate company which along with its group companies had undertaken various projects in Delhi NCR and at other places in Uttar Pradesh during the period 1988-2015.

(ii) Due to various reasons, 26 FIRs came to be registered against the appellant in various jurisdictions.

(iii) On 09.09.2021, the respondent ED registered an ECIR bearing no. ECIR/21/STF/2021 against M/s Supertech Ltd. and others and started investigation under the PMLA. The appellant was also summoned under Section 50 of PMLA on various dates during which his statements were also recorded.

(iv) During March 2022, some insolvency proceedings came to be filed against the company M/s Supertech Ltd. before the NCLT, which passed some interlocutory orders. The matter was also taken up by the appellant before the NCLAT with settlement proposal, however during the pendency of the insolvency proceedings, the respondent ED passed a provisional attachment order on 11.04.2023, provisionally attaching certain personal properties of the appellant and filed an original complaint (OC No. 1974/2023) on 04.05.2023, before the Adjudicating Authority, PMLA, seeking confirmation of the provisional attachment order in terms of Section 8 of PMLA.

(v) On 12.05.2023, the Adjudicating Authority, PMLA, issued a notice to the appellant under Section 8(1) of the PMLA calling upon the appellant to show cause as to why the properties provisionally attached should not be confirmed as the properties involved in money laundering.

(vi) According to the appellant, before he could reply to the said show cause notice, on 27.06.2023 he was arrested by the respondent ED without serving to the appellant the ground of arrest.

(vii) On 28.06.2023, the appellant was produced before the Special Court, New Delhi, where the ED sought remand. The Special Court remanded the appellant to the ED custody till 10.07.2023 and thereafter the appellant was sent to judicial custody for 14 days till 24.07.2023.

(viii) The appellant had filed a bail application on 12.07.2023 before the Special Court, the same came to be dismissed by the Special Court on 22.07.2023. The appellant was sent to the judicial custody for further period of 14 days i.e till 07.08.2023, which subsequently came to be extended till 21.08.2023.

(ix) The appellant filed a Writ Petition being no. W.P. (Crl.) No.336/2023 before this Court challenging the order dated 22.07.2023 passed by the Special Court dismissing his bail application. The said writ p